It is a “mystery” why the Government’s Defamation (Amendment) Bill has not proposed a “serious harm” test in all defamation cases, the Oireachtas media committee heard on Wednesday.
Speaking on behalf of news industry group NewsBrands Ireland, Daniel McConnell, editor of the Business Post, urged members of the committee to back its call for an extension of the Bill’s proposed serious harm test to all cases.
The general scheme of the Bill, published last March, suggested that such a test – designed to reduce vexatious claims – should only apply to cases taken by corporate bodies, public authorities and retailers.
“The Irish media faces, on an almost daily basis, unwarranted and exaggerated claims for defamation. The costs of defending these cases are significant, and these costs are often unrecoverable even where the defence succeeds,” Mr McConnell said.
File being prepared for DPP over insider trading
Christmas tech for kids: great gift ideas with safety features for parental peace of mind
MenoPal app offers proactive support to women going through menopause
Ezviz RE4 Plus review: Efficient budget robot cleaner but can suffer from wanderlust under the wrong conditions
“A serious harm test for all defamation proceedings would alleviate the costs of such unwarranted claims and the risks to Ireland associated with SLAPPs (strategic lawsuits against public participation) and ‘libel tourism’,” Mr McConnell said.
[ Sinn Féin’s libel actions attract mounting criticism in wake of Belfast rulingOpens in new window ]
The committee also heard from representatives of regional newspaper body Local Ireland, the Press Council of Ireland, the Office of the Press Ombudsman, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and the Independent Broadcasters of Ireland (IBI).
Representing Local Ireland, Connacht Tribune editor Dave O’Connell welcomed a clause in the proposed legislation that puts an onus on legal advisers to draw a client’s attention to the alternative redress system available through the press ombudsman.
“These are very simple and straightforward steps which can avert very long, drawn out and costly legal actions,” he said.
Susan McKay, the Press Ombudsman, said it was “disquieting” to hear editors talk about the chilling effect on journalistic investigations prompted by legal threats.
“We are as concerned as our members about the dangers that defamation suits pose to freedom of expression. If the press holds power to account, it is not in the public interest to risk bankrupting it.”
[ Slapps, lawfare and Buying Silence: How the wealthy and powerful evade scrutinyOpens in new window ]
NUJ Irish secretary Séamus Dooley told the committee that “one action could wipe out a regional newspaper” and that a serious harm test and well-funded complaints structure must go hand-in-hand in order to protect the public interest.
John Purcell, chairman of the IBI, whose members are subject to statutory regulation by Coimisiún na Meán, noted that the Irish market had not yet seen a “weaponisation of complaints processes” for political ends, as he said had been the case in other countries.
“It is a system built on good faith which can [be] and increasingly is abused. Thankfully, we are not in an unmanageable situation yet; however, we have no reason to believe that this trend may not emerge in this country. We have seen some isolated incidents. This will become very problematic for broadcasters and indeed for the regulatory system,” he said.
- Sign up for Business push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our Inside Business podcast is published weekly - Find the latest episode here
